My brother and I are fairly new to the game, but does anyone else feel like the Revised set's balancing puts far too much weight behind Close Combat? We're both competent gamers, and we've played through the Victory Bridge missions once, and the Allies got completely wrecked pretty much every game, largely (seemingly?) because their almost-complete lack of units that can shoot over 2 (notably the generally-awful Death Dealers - who we've renamed The Ineffective Basterds - rarely did anything of note) and the generally less-useful mech, The Blackhawk, seems to leave the Allies at a huge disadvantage, no? Plus most of the Axis have Damage Resilience, AND Armor Class 3, both of which block almost every Allied attack. That's at least as far as the campaign missions go - we've played a few random games that actually had useful cover for the Allies, and it made them much more effective and closer games (even if the Axis still won every game, it was tight), but we both found Victory Bridge to be wildly lacking in map balance if all you are using are the Revised Core units (which we are).

So, two questions, I guess - has anyone else found this to be the case, and does anyone have suggestions for 2 units to equalize things a little better. I was thinking Grim Reapers to give the Allies some firing range (I'm assuming 4?) without bringing in new rules or buying the Upgrade Cards, and the Axis Apes to give the Axis a little bit of Close Combat power? Command Units seem to be the standard first expansion suggestion, but that doesn't seem to be what's needed from just the Revised Core set, exactly. Help appreciated!

I have played the Victory Bridge campaign twice using only the units from the RCS. When the Axis were attacking and the Allies defending (as it's somehow supposed to be in the campaign), the Axis won 5 of the 6 scenarios. Surprisingly, the Allied won the campaign when they were attacking. Still, I often thought the allied units from the RCS lack range and firepower in ranged combat. It took me some time (and also some more units) to actually pull off some allied wins. Grim Reapers for the Allies and Apes or Zombies for the Axis really could even things out.

Ah, good to hear! We'll try a run-through with the Allies attacking next to see how it goes, probably with a few new units. Thanks for feedback!

Before you buy into the Axis apes, might I suggest the Zombies instead. They have five to a unit instead of three, and have damage resilient, so they have staying power over the Apes. Their only draw back is they get no soft cover save, and hard cover only works on a bullseye. This is not really as big a draw back as you would think when you realize how many allied units ignore cover. Just in the RCS the Hell Boys and the Hammers+Rhino. Zombies cost a little more per squad, but are cheaper per figure. 24ap for Apes = 8ap per fig, 31ap for zombies = 6.2ap per fig.

Just my 2 pfennigs worth

fhaugh said:

Zombies are awesome! My bro plays the Axis and I the Allies and hate them with a passion. They're really cool units that fits pretty well in a ranged Axis army, giving them some close combat terror…well LOTS of terror!

Love playing against them lol!

Another advantage of the Zombies is that you have two cool heroes that are able to join them in the Axis Hero pack, while you'll have to buy Operation Seelöwe to get Markus who may join the Apes. The Axis Hero pack will also offer Stefan who can join the Sturmpioniere.

Thanks for all the advice, everybody! I was looking over the Zombie cards and was wondering about the drawbacks of the no-soft-cover business. There's something so badass about gorillas though, just visually, that I just want to see them on the battlefield! that's probably not very good general-ing, though.

LongDarkBlues said:

It may not be the best tactics, but this is a game. If your not having fun, what's the point?

Good point about having fun with the game. Really looking forward to getting this game.